Change Your Image
ricsim78
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
65 (2023)
Unique concept but a lot of issues kept it from being a good movie!
Adam Driver is an awesome actor, he came out of no where and has basically killed every single role he has taken. When I saw the trailer for this movie, combining Driver, adventure, sci-fi, and dinosaurs, I could not wait to see it.
I just bought it and watched it tonight, and though I cannot say it is a "bad" movie, I cannot really say it is a good one, either. 10 out of 10 for concept, but lacking in execution and so many cliches, you can predict what is going to happen most of the movie.
Minimal dialog due to a language barrier of the
I think the reason Driver is getting called boring in this (or being criticized for being "just okay"), is by no means his fault. For some reason, they had to make the only two characters (in a movie with a whole four actors, of which two just had very small parts) have a language barrier. So we could understand Driver's character, but not the girl Koa (played by Ariana Greenblatt). This fails to showcase any of Driver's talents as an actor and certainly takes away from character development. Making them have more dialog would have made this a much better movie. I give him credit for making the most of what they gave him and he did just fine. I think anyone in his role would have been dubbed "just okay" if they killed the part, and a bad character if not acted well. It did showcase his military training, which was cool though.
The special effects are really good, but I would have preferred more realistic portrayals of the dinosaurs, as they certainly took a lot of liberties. But everything looks real and the special effects are really good. The dinosaurs look very realistic, even despite the non-realistic liberties. More of them would have been better as well.
The story is like the dinosaurs, lots of liberties taken, besides the cliches', this is another huge issue. Keep in mind, there is also a language barrier between the two, so dialog is mostly them trying to figure out how to communicate.
Mills is military trained and knows there are various threats all over, but constantly leaves his gun on the ground and does not check how much ammunition he has.
Koa and Mills get separated, Mills is frantically looking for her even though he is trapped, while she easilys gets back outside and seems to have some kind of epiphany and goes wandering around instead of trying to reunite with (or save) Mills (looking like she has no danger to worry about or concern for Mills. Mills,who she is starting to care about, happens to be the only adult human around, and her only means of getting saved from the dangers! This was a huge "huh" moment for me and made no sense at all.
The fact it featured the Chicxulub asteroid I figured out as soon as they saw the moon with a bright point by it, which is what really happened as Chicxulub passed the moon before it hit Earth. It is also what an observer would have seen if they were watching the night sky. This was an awesome inclusion and earns a star just for this.
The pacing is pretty good, yet there are some boring parts and unnecessary parts. The beginning makes you wonder how they got there, and the end is ambiguous. How the ship was dropped and ripped at multiple times, yet flyable and no air leaks I place in the "plot convenience" sector.
In conclusion, I loved the concept from the trailer, Driver was good, and Greenblatt was good. The execution ranges from okay to poor, and the biggest issue is the choice of making the characters have a language barrier, when really there were only two characters around for the vast majority of the movie. This was a poor choice and hurt this movie a lot, and you can read it through the reviews (professional and user) that the majority feel the same way. Incredible concept but really poorly executed. Driver and Greenblatt did awesome for what they were given though!
The Batman (2022)
Boring Batman, who would have thought? Disappointed and bleak!
First off, this movie is NOT a Batman movie, it is a detective/serial killer "who done it" movie that has race-swapped versions of certain characters in the Batman Universe and features Batman and other characters from The Batman Universe. But too many liberties were taken with everything.
The old Batman show was campy, but had fun and charm. The Keaton Batman movies are amazing. The Nolan Batman movies (all three of them) were really good and awesome. The animated movies, we will forget about the 90's ones after Michael Keaton left the role!
Now, you have Robert Pattinson as the Batman/Bruce Wayne. I think it was not him that was the problem, it was what he was given to work with. He spends the entire movie with a "I have never laughed before and might cry soon" face. I know people type-cast him as "That guy from Twilight", but he has shown he can act in other movies. I think, given the right direction, he would make a very good Batman. He just overdid the "Dark, brooding" quality Batman has and was too serious at both roles. Christian Bale did it much better and had a ton more contrast with Batman vs. Bruce Wayne.
We have Zoë Kravitz as Selena Kyle/Catwoman, apparently they ran out of white blonde women to play her in Hollywood? That said, she looks good and played the part fine, even though I have never seen anyone that determined to find out what happened to their friend!
One big issue ism my family and I had to hear the line where she thanks the Riddler for killing "all these white privileged a-holes", which was uncalled for in a Batman movie! It is okay for the Riddler to kill said people, yet he is the alleged bad guy? That line, after being bored and the other issues, nearly made me stop watching this. My five year old daughter asked me what that was supposed to mean, and I was not happy having to make something up for that stupid line. Not sure what they were thinking but there is enough of that elsewhere!
Jeffrey Wright, another race swap, did just okay as James Gordon. While I think he is a good actor, he is the same as in Westworld and every other movie/show I have see him in. Gary Oldman was the best and definitive movie version, but why they race swapped the characters is beyond me.
Paul Dano has a unique look and could have been a great choice as The Riddler. Instead, he seemed like the Joker with a garbage bag over his head. I cannot for the life of me figure out what Matt Reeves was thinking. He should have looked and acted a lot more like the Dark Knight PC/PS4/Xbox One game. With better material, he could have really done something.
Andy Serkis did not work for me as Alfred. Michael Caine and Michael Gough were much better in the role. Serkis is awesome, but they did not give him enough. In the end he seems like just a plot device to give Bruce Wayne/Batman motivation to solve who the Riddler is.
The Penguin was a big anomaly, I could not even recognize Colin Farrell! The fact he was more like a scared thug than a villain was a weird liberty, he did have some of the only funny lines in the movie though.
The action scenes were pretty good, seen better and worse. The new Batmobile was incredible, I give them that. Gotham did not look like Gotham to me, it looks like a city with Gotham signs thrown into it. Nolan went for realism, but I liked his Gotham better than this. They can ride motorcycles in full speed with constant rain!
The plot is what actually sucks, boring, too long, and they could have told the same story while cutting a whole hour out. It is like you spend the whole movie waiting for something to happen, but it never happens.
They did make Batman more a detective, which was more like the comic version, but the beginning of the movie starts out awkward and never loses that. Matt Reeves could have done much better.
A better plot, better direction, no race swapping, and not taking so many liberties with everything could have made this a very good Batman reboot. Instead, we got a snooze fest that could have been it's own movie without parts of the Batman Universe in it.
It Comes at Night (2017)
The issue I had, nothing came at night and this could have been done so much better!
First, I am all for movies that do not hold your hand or explain things, just kind of making you a spectator of an already happening event. The dog is sensing things outside at night and is quieted by his owners, then runs off and we expect him to die. Unfortunately, I was right about the dog's fate, but the dog was not attacked by a creature or entity. Although there is an obvious danger that appears to be some kind of virus or chemical weapon, the son draws evil entities and seems the dog sensed something out there that he seemed to pursue when he went after "something".
This would have been a better movie, and made more sense in context, but instead it is a virus or chemical attack. There is no explanation, clarity, and the whole movie you are wondering what the heck everyone is going on about.
Joel Edgerton was good, as usual. The acting is good from everyone, so that is not the issue. This is one of those movies where you are waiting for something crazy to happen, with a lot more action. Instead, it is unexplained, unclear what is happening, unclear if it is just the son's imagination.
The ending is very sad, starting with the gunshot, the ending was stupid. It was never explained who was opening the door, or why. After a while, you realize it could have been the son who was the "thing that came at night", but the very ending seems to discount that.
With an awesome premise, the delivery was too vague, the execution was worse, and the ending left me waiting for something else that never happened, the credits started rolling...that was the end?
The acting performances were really good, the strongest point of the movie. There are a few very sad parts, but this is not a movie I would recommend unless you literally like to be a spectator with events you may not fully understand.
Troy: Fall of a City (2018)
Mixed bag but I enjoyed it as a show.
As a story and show, by itself, it was watchable and I liked a lot of it.
But as a re-imagining of the Illiad.....horrible. Black actors as Zeus and Achilles? I found that very PR, and while both actors did well, Zeus was fine and David Gyasi was a very good and presence-filled Achilles. But it is wrong and offensive, much as it would be to cast Matt Damon as Malcolm X or Tom Cruise as a slave in Amistad! They can act the part and do well, too. But it would be offensive in the same right. In fact, almost none of the actors were Greek at all.
I liked Troy with Brad Pitt, but did not like Orlando Bloom as Paris. Louis Hunter was much better in the role. But their love seemed wooden, and though Bella Dayne is attractive and a good actress, she just did not fit the part or look it. The woman who played Aphrodite (Lex King) should have been cast as Helen, as she is one of the most beautiful ladies I have ever seen and carries a grace about her, filling the role better. She also ethnically is closer to what Helen should be.
Some of it was stupid (Achilles "love scene") and I did not like them butchering characters like Menelaus "the thug/rapist king" (though the actor was good). Overall was worth watching but could have been much better! Not as bad as most seem to think for me, solid 5/5.
The Princess Bride (1987)
GREAT movie for kids and a classic
I loved this movie as a kid, it has a little of everything (action, romance, adventure, humor, supernatural, fantasy, to name most). But now as an adult, sadly I do not think this movie held up over time (at least for myself). I actually found it boring and rather childish, but I still rate this highly because I am sure a lot of people will like watching this.
Definitely a classic movie and worth a watch, just no longer up there with my favorites. The acting is great, characters are classic, and it has a lot to like. I just wish it held up better for me, but I still recommend it (if that makes sense). Cary Elwes proves yet again that he is a great and very under-rated actor, as he carries this movie and plays the part naturally. He was pretty young in this as well, the rest of the cast is spot on in their respective parts. For kids, this movie could not be more highly recommended.
Annabelle (2014)
Thanks for NOT making this like the real legend Hollywood!
Where do I even begin with this one? I just came back from seeing this and I am near angry from what I saw. It is best to read this if you have not seen this, if you do then you have been warned! Okay, so the movie has NOTHING to do with the real Annabelle legend, and the doll itself is so ugly, who would even want it? The real Annabelle doll is a simple "Raggedy Anne" doll, this thing looks like a monstrosity! The acting was pretty decent from Mia, and her character is not as stupid as most in this genre, but a lot of this movie insults your intelligence! The husband is a "generic loving husband" but he has a so-so screen presence. The rest of the people seem just around in order to be killed off and/or attacked by "Annabelle".
The doll: is all "Hollywooded" up, creepy eyes, looks like a boy doll, creepy realistic eyes. They should have kept the doll as a simple looking doll (especially if it was authentic looking to the real doll) that would obviously be desirable. No, they had to make it look all creepy. This alone may actually hurt sales of the movie, which I feel is deserved.
The story: Again, just as an excuse for things to happen. A couple are about to have a baby, he buys her a doll because he feels guilty, said doll happens to be possessed by a demon. Weird things start to happen, building in intensity until the final "confrontation of evil" Yep...must be a typical generic Hollywood horror movie plot! A lot of boredom hits you as the story is just like watching a typical newborn baby toting couple trying to make it in this world. Radios go off on their own, sewing machines, devil worshipers kill neighbors and try to attack the main characters. That is when you know stuff is getting real! The real Annabelle doll was a Raggedy Anne doll that was owned by two nursing students. The doll would be found moved from where last left, impossibly standing on it's own, and weird things would happen. James Wan should have kept the story as the legend, as the real story was a lot scarier than this generic tale.
There is some pretty scary looking scenes, the ones who had the demon in them were well done, even if he looked like a black version of the demon from Insidious. The doll itself never moves, it just sits or lays there, looking menacing. It also gets more and more ugly as the movie progresses. James Wan claims that he would have had issues with the Raggedy Anne right holders, but he could have made the doll "alive". Instead, it just seemed like a demon "around the doll", not contained within it.
I am so sick of Hollywood messing up my favorite ghost stories! "An American Haunting", and now "Annabelle". What I went to see was the legends unfold on film. Instead, "An American Haunting" had little to do with the actually Bell Witch legend, and blamed the haunting on John Bell molesting his daughter! How would you like your ancestors to be be chastised by Hollywood? If I was a descendant of the Bell family, I would be outraged by that! "Annabelle" is very poorly executed, often boring, and all about "convenience" instead of a thing called "Plot". Horrible and disappointed!
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
A few things that did not work/add up for me...solid 6 stars
**SPOILERS** There is a few things that just made NO sense or just basically left me {as the viewer}, feeling unsatisfied or worse yet, down-right confused! As much as I like Nolan and Tom Hardy with his portrayal of Bane, I have quite a few things that make this my least favorite of the series, with TDK being the best. Mostly because a few things either did not make much sense or were plot holes to me.
-Batman: Sure, all of his crime fighting and injuries took a toll on his body, but all you do is get these cool rings that tighten over your knees and suddenly it not only fixes your legs, it fixes all the rest of your injuries and bad limbs? This one is not such a big deal, but still I found it rather comical and ridiculous.
-Batman's "gruff voice": Sure, Batman disguises his voice like in Batman Begins and TDK, but did they really have to make it so over the top? Now even talking to people who are his allies, he speaks in a growl when he used to just speak in a husky voice. They should have left it like the first film, which was believable without being over the top.
-Bane: is physically the superior of Batman; in the opening fight scene he beats Batman easily and overpowers him. He is also in the majority of the film shown to be a criminal mastermind and seems to have all his bases covered, breaking necks and cashing checks. Then, in the end, he ends up doing all of this thanks to his puppy love for Talia al Ghul. He is a mere henchman and stooge for Talia. Then to add insult to injury, he is killed off like an afterthought by Catwoman on a Batpod. The man who broke Batman and took over the crime of Gotham, gets taken out with a gun as an afterthought?
Talia al Ghul: I can understand a love-interest with a hidden agenda, revenge. Why would she sleep with him when her ultimate goal was to just get revenge on him for her father and carry out his dream to destroy Gotham? Acting as a love interest is one thing, but that makes no sense. I know she had to get his trust but hard to believe she would want to do that considering her father fell because of Batman...
Surprised: Anne Hathaway is hot, and she surprised me with her portrayal of Catwoman without being over the top (Halle Berry much}. She pulled off the sexiness which I thought would be hard for her (or anyone for that matter} and was very good in the role. This was a positive thing and I was impressed because many thought she could never pull it off.
6/10: Has a lot of redeeming qualities, but falls short in a lot of areas. No where near as good as TDK and not as good as Batman Begins. Being realistic should not prevent things from making sense.
King Arthur (2004)
One of my all time favorite movies!
This movie, to me, has everything that makes a movie great. It keeps you entertained in different ways. Action, drama, comedy, adventure, and romance. The cast is really well done, Clive Owen is an amazing actor and really owns the role of Arthur. He is heroic, yet always cares for his men and the people around him. Stellan Skarsgård also did an amazing job with his performance as Cerdic.
The cast is a lot of what really makes this movie, everyone does their part extremely well. You actually care about the characters, which seems to be rarer nowadays. The Knights, villains, love interest, and everybody make this movie a lot of what it is. The Knights in particular are amusing how they interact. They manage to stay in character the whole movie, another rare feat in a lot of modern movies.
The video is amazing on this movie, with some breathtaking scenes and just great choices in scenery. The sound is equally enjoyable, the Blu-ray version played through my Denon X4000 sounds phenomenal. One of my favorite scenes, on the frozen lake, you can hear subtle and not too subtle sounds. The dialog is always clear and never drowned out by the action.
This movie is not without fault, and some of it can be determined on whether or not you expected a "historically accurate" version of this movie. Considering King Arthur is largely a legend, is it really historically accurate? Besides, that has been done before. This is a lot like Robin Hood with Kevin Costner, it is a vision based on the legend and a very well done one. Besides, King Arthur has been done before, so a different take of the tale is welcome. So what, the Woads use barbed wire shot by arrows, which was not invented until way after the movie's time period. And the actual legend is a lot more fanciful than this movie will be.
Sacrifice, great loss, camaraderie, love, friendship, epic battles, heroism, struggle, and many other things...this movie handles is all very well. A lot of the movie is very cleverly done, which makes some amazing scenes like the "battle of the frozen lake" scene I spoke of. I highly suggest this movie to anyone but those who worry about historical accuracy. If you look for that, you should not worry about King Arthur anyhow!
Predators (2010)
Better than the AVP movies at least
Note: I probably won't do any spoilers but it is there is just case.
I was really excited to see this, after being horribly let down by the first AVP movie (not even bothering to check out the newer ones).
I am a big fan of the original and I thought part II was pretty awesome as well.
The good: I liked the cast and the way they knew nothing about how they arrived on the planet. You are basically thrown into the mix just like they are. The cast was good but definitely not as fun as the original. The scenery looked awesome, as does the female character, I think she is attractive. Adrien Brody did a great job and I felt his character was interesting. Topher Grace's character was good as well, he seems to be playing a lot of characters like this.
The bad: (Warning: this may be counted as spoiler). The two different types of Predators thing was stupid (reminds me of a gimmick done in Jurassic Park 3, when there just HAD to be a bigger and badder dinosaur than T-Rex). Just keeping one set of Predators and actually keeping them in their roles would have been better. It seemed like less sport and more like they were just out to kill the people, which does not seem to me like how the Predator was intended to be.
This could have been so much better, they got the scenery right and some plot twists were good, but in the end I was left unsatisfied and overall disappointed. I can name 100 ways to make this movie better, but I am sure there are those who will love it as well.
Overall, it was kind of disappointing and I am hoping that maybe we will see the Predator character in a better movie some time in the future.
The Happening (2008)
Great idea for a movie poorly realized and acted even worse!
I must say I was really looking forward to seeing this movie. M. Night Shyamalan made me a fan back when I first watched "The Sixth Sense" (one of my favorite movies of all time, and one of my favorite movies about ghosts), "Unbreakable" was a unique and awesome movie, and I enjoyed "Signs".
Then he made a stinker called, "The Village". Another unique idea, decently acted but it just did not have the same impact as his previous films. Afterwords he nearly loses me as a fan altogether with, "Lady In the Water." (One of the biggest problems is that he decided to write himself into the movie and basically ends up being the savior. That is a bit vain!) Well acted, interesting characters, but poorly executed. If his films were a roller coaster, it would be one that started at the top and now is at the very bottom.
So finally, his chance at redemption comes to theaters, and his first R-rated film to boot. The Happening is finally happening! The first half hour is the movie is good, and interesting.
Then, like his movie quality, it all goes downhill from there! The acting? Unbelievably bad! Mark Wahlberg, whom I have always liked, is definitely miscast and his acting is painful to watch. Then you have Zooey Deschanel who is basically just there to look gorgeous and smile a lot. You never get the sense that she is actually in danger, and she is another person I am a fan of that just seems like she is out of her game and just along for the ride. John Leguizamo (think they decided to cast everyone who has names that are hard to say or pronounce) is the only exception, he plays a slightly different role than usual and does a decent job. Not that he did an exceptional job, but decent enough and would have been fine had everyone else been up to par! Not sure who is at fault, but I have seen all 3 do much better jobs elsewhere.
The extras? No better but some of them show up the higher profile actors. This hurts everything in the movie and takes away from the movie. You are so stunned by the acting quality it is hard to pay attention to much else, besides except Zooey Deschanel (looks, not acting!)
Besides the acting, how about the movie? Unique idea, poorly realized and the script is an abomination.
Not sure what his next film will be like, but yeah this one was maybe the most disappointing of all of his movies. I still have hopes he can bring us at least something as good as "Signs" and maybe to the level of "Unbreakable" but I think a "Sixth Sense" level is out of his reach anymore.
2 out of 10 is all I can give this, as there are worse movies that came out, but not much worse!
The Strangers (2008)
Insults one's intelligence.
Not only was this a boring, campy, pointless movie....the characters are so dumb they deserve to die: Liv Tyler has a phone yet instead of calling the police she calls her man (where the heck did he go, anyway?) The car gets smashed windows and flattened tires yet neither hear it happen even though it is quiet outside and it is a secluded house. The blonde girl seems to have the ability to teleport. The guy does not even know how to use the shot gun, yet managed to hit his buddy with a direct head shot immediately as he comes into view from a blind corner. Plus, he is searching small book shelves for a full size shotgun that obviously would not fit. This is just an example of the stupidness you will endure watching this movie! The ads looked good, and I wanted to see it is theaters but missed my chance, so was excited when it came out on video. That and the "inspired by true events" moniker made me want to see it more. Guess what? This story was "inspired" by the director having someone ding dong ditch his house. That is the "true story" that "inspired" this "movie". This made me more mad then the pointlessness, unbelievably dumb characters, and lack of explanations this movie gives! Quite clever, really.
There is no point, the "Strangers" are portrayed as real people with sacks over their heads, yet seem to be able to predict every (dumb) action the characters do, know locations of phones and smoke detectors, and seem to be able to teleport and destroy cars silently, sneak in and out of the house undetected.
I would not recommend this movie to anyone, even with people who have like brainless movies, this one is still to sure upset you! One of the worst movies that were best at being marketed.
The Karate Kid Part III (1989)
Fairly horrible sequel!
So Mr. Miyagi and Daniel LaRusso are back a third time. The original is still one of the best, "Little guy takes out Bullies" stories ever realized on film. It was definitely a classic. Ralph Macchio managed to pull off the part fairly flawlessly, despite being older than he was supposed to be. The Karate Kid part 2 is in some ways just as good, some ways better. But, it was another good movie that is worth seeing again.
Now, 35 year old (!) Ralph Macchio comes back as the Karate Kid again, and now they are back from Okinawa. The film opens with John Kreese, the defeated Cobra Kai sensai from the first film. He is disgraced, broke, and still steaming at both Daniel and especially Mr. Miyagi. He runs into an "Old Vietnam war buddy" named Terry Silver, played by Thomas Ian Griffin who happens to be a year younger than Ralph Macchio in real life! Silver is a rich businessman and like Reese has a deep rooted mean streak plus likes to see frail looking teens suffer. Together they vow to bring the Cobra Kai dojo back and better than ever, and (as the main plot of the movie) get revenge on both Daniel and Miyagi. I like the plot premise, and I always wondered what happened to Kreese. Martin Kove still does a great job here.
We learn a lot of things about Daniel in this film. He has been eating too much without exercising (looks easily 30-40 pounds heavier than in the first 2 films), he likes to have conversations with Bonsai trees, and he apparently forgot all that training and lessons from the past. We also learn, (again) that a simple glance to Mr. Miyagi can make Daniel defeat a far superior opponent. I need a Mr. Miyagi when life gets rough! Robyn Lively is Jessica Andrews, the new love interest and her acting is just plain terrible! I remember when I was younger I found her very easy to look at, but even then I thought they had no chemistry. Later I found out later he is not even near her age either. I have recently seen her in a couple of shows and she has improved and still hot...maybe she just knew this was a bad film and wanted to complete it asap? The true standout in this film is Thomas Ian Griffin as Terry Silver. He plays the role perfectly, when he is making Daniel hurt himself and he hides around a corner and celebrates you really get a grasp of how well he played the part. Martin Kove and Sean Kanan both do a great job as well, but he is the real standout. He also seems the most skilled of the 3 villains but is easily dispatched by Miyagi.
I think this was a poorly written sequel that has the purpose of making a quick buck off the Karate Kid franchise. It's sad really, because the first two were awesome films that I remember as part of my childhood. It's better than the spin off but that is not saying much.
Paranormal State (2007)
Good idea, sounds good...but poorly done.
Let me first off say that I am a believer of ghosts, and I do indeed know they exist. I have had enough experiences with them to know they are there.
What I hate is the people who bring the Bible and Religion into all of this. People forget there is more than one "Bible", thousands of religions and beliefs, and different ways to interpret what is said in the Bible. Not everyone believes in God, and not everyone believes in stereo-typical religion.
Religion does not make everything fact, one of the things I should mention in the Bible that many do not know is that even the most rampant Bible thumper is breaking the very rules written within....you are supposed to never wear more than one fabric at one time, slavery is OK, and you may murder your neighbor under certain circumstances. None of this, "Oh that was the Old testament, and now we have the New Testament." If the Bible is the word of God, and cannot be changed..there should be no changes, or versions. Religion is full of misinterpretations, mixed facts, and people who so blindly follow it that there, "Is no other way." The excuses these said blind followers use are either pathetic, or they themselves cannot explain the discrepancies properly, and instead use excuses handed down to them from either their Pastor or teacher.
But anyhow, onto the review. I am a decent fan of "Ghost Hunters" and when I heard this show was coming soon, I was pretty excited and thought it had some potential. As much as I like watching "Ghost Hunters", I do not like some of their members, and I do not like the way they can dismiss a place as being haunted, yet cannot explain anything that is going on. Just because your investigation equipment does not pick it up, does not mean the camera filming the show did not. I am glad they are skeptical, but it's like they do not understand that just because you did not get anything on your recorder and film does not make the place haunted or not. If Ghosts were that easy to capture, it would be known as a fact, not a belief. It's more of a "right place at the right time" kind of thing, as well as if there is something there, what makes you think it's going to "perform" for you? This show is kind of silly. It's usually boring, and there is lots of talk, lots of psychics, yet hardly anything happens. The main guy's filtered narration is usually either boring to listen to, or is basically not needed.
Also, the reliance on psychics is too abundant, as I believe VERY few of them are actually gifted. Silvia Brown is one I definitely believe in, but most are sometimes hard to believe.
I really wanted to like this show, but of the few I have seen I have yet to be terribly impressed.
Cyborg (1989)
One of my favorite JCVD movies, a classic.
This is a very cool movie: great fight scenes (and chase), great villain (if he would shut up at times), and Jean-Claude Van Damme plays, as usual, a great main character. He has a knack for playing a realistic person, with extraordinary fighting skills. There is a certain down to earth attribute he has, yet he is still larger than life. Not many action stars can manage to be that way. He is very believable as the main character. Not sure if you can count what I say about the movie as a spoiler or not, but it's there just in case.
The plot is pretty good, and has two sides of it. In the future, after a plague sweeps the land, the strong survive and often prey upon the weak.
On one hand, Gibson (JCVD's character) wants nothing but revenge on Fender for what he did to his love, and her children. He is a man who had a rough life, settled down with someone he fell in love with (along with her children), and started living the good life. His dream was shattered by a gang member and his crew. He is now but a shadow of his former self, living and breathing only to track down and take revenge on Fender and his gang, referred to as "Pirates".
He saves the life of a woman, and discovers she is a Cyborg. She claims to have the cure for the plague, and needs to be escorted to a place where doctors reside. Gibson is not interested, he only wants revenge. He happens to run into a young woman who also wants to help with the cure, and becomes his companion.
Without giving anything else away, here is the good, the bad, and the ugly about this movie.
The Good: *Fight scenes *Scenery (looks real in every scene.) *Story *Action *Plot *Hero, villain, and support. *Believable characters, motives, and the message the movie delivers *One of the best foot chase scenes ever seen in a movie
The Bad: *The Dialog is VERY bad at times. *Special Effects were pretty primitive, like the cyborg scene was pretty bad *Though Fender (Played by Vincent Klyn) is a very well done "bad guy" for the most part, his dialog is pretty bad at times, probably the worst in the whole movie. He throws in random cuss words, and the way he structures sentences is not very realistic sometimes. He has a deep voice, and his opening narration (where he tells the story) was pretty good, and realistic. You will understand when you see it.
The Ugly: *The guttural noises Fender makes while he is fighting Gibson at the end was just stupid, and ruined a good fight scene. He even changes pitch with the stupid yelling and such as he is hitting and being hit. Probably the worst part of the movie overall, and at a terrible moment: The final confrontation!
Still, the movie moves at a good pace, some of the scenes are just amazing, and despite the few flaws (especially character dialog and Fender's vocals in the last scene) it still ranks up there as one of my favorite movies. You can relate to the main character, and his struggles to become "human" again after loosing everything he held dear. Also, I really like the sound track, and the end credit song is really awesome sounding. When it plays during the fight scenes it's really good. Definitely worth seeing, especially if you are a fan of post apocalyptic, Van Damm, or Sci-Fi movies, or just want a night with a great action film. Check this one out!
Someone must have really liked guitars, because you will notice most characters have a guitar Brand name in their names. Fender, Marshall, Gibson, and more. Kind of cool I guess.
The Mummy (1999)
One of my all time favorite movies
First off, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but most of the low ratings I am seeing are criticizing "The Mummy" because of it's "weak plot" or someone even said that this movie could have been written by the person's dog!
Does anyone realize that there is different movie genres? If you go to see "The Mummy" and expect to see "The Departed", "The Godfather", or "Shawshank Redemption" then yes, of course you will be disappointed. This is not a drama, it's an action/adventure movie!
Everyone has commented on the fun of this movie, that is what this movie is all about! Personally, I think the story is very good, and interesting. There is a lot to like here: it has elements of action, adventure, comedy, fantasy, mythology, horror, and tells a pretty well made tale (seriously, how many movies manage to pull all of these things off? And pull them off well!). And, it manages to do all of this in style, with amazing special effects and action sequences. No, it's not perfect (what movie is?) but this movie kills most movies in the same genre! I have never seen a movie that can contain so many different elements while still being coherent. This movie is a technical marvel is many aspects!
Rachel Weisz is great and looks beautiful as well playing as Evelyn. Yes, she is something like a "typical damsel in distress", but she brings humor, intelligence, and a strong will to the part. It's hard to integrate so many qualities into a believable character, but she does it well.
Brendan Fraser as Rick O'Connell: After seeing him in so many goofy movies, playing an equally goofy character, I thought he was always going to be cast in lame movies such as "Encino Man" and "Monkeybones". He was the reason why I had doubts I would like the movie because I could not picture him being more than a one-dimensional actor (able to pull goofy-charismatic off only). Not only does he act the part with stride, but he nails every aspect of his character: He is cool, yet has humor and he really surprised me with how much depth he can add to a role that really doesn't need it! Rick O'Connell wields his dual guns with flair, and I will never doubt Fraser again! I just hope they keep him utilized more and more like this. I was really impressed with him most because he surpassed all expectations!
Everyone else did their parts extremely well, they always stay in character, and add to the elements of the story.
This movie has a lot to offer, and lots of different ways to get your interest, especially if the Ancient Egyptian mythology fascinates you. This movie does have elements of horror: it will most likely scare younger kids more than adults, but putting yourself in the characters places you would be quite afraid.
Imhotep is very scary, mostly because of all the different abilities he possesses, as well as forms he can take.
I could not recommend this movie enough, especially if you have a HDTV and have the High Definition version, you will be blown away! Just don't expect a character driven drama, you're not looking for that with this either!
Date Movie (2006)
Possibly the biggest waste of money or time ever made
I went to see this movie when it came out in theaters, it looking very promising but like what has already been said: The whole audience was sitting in stunned silence...this included us!
Dull humor, stupid, and you'll want the time you wasted watching this back, as well as the money you spend. This movie should have came with a refund! I did not laugh one time, and this is a comedy movie. The spoofs were not funny, the actors were not charismatic enough to make this work, and it's full of nothing but empty "humor". I hope I save a few people from wasting their time with this. I wasted $30.00 on this movie (2 tickets, 2 drinks, popcorn) and it really makes me mad to spend that much money on trash!
Scary Movie 4 (2006)
Easily the worst in the series
Keeping this short and simple, I was severely disappointed with this movie. I wanted to like it, I liked 1 and 2, 3 was the best and most humorous, and then this stinker! I think I laughed twice through the whole movie, and the first was in the opening sequence which I had already seen in the previews (why do they do that anyhow?) To sum it up, if you like Wayans style humor (gross out, stereotypes which ring true, and goofy humor) watch 1 or 2 (1 is better).
If you like thoughtful, slapstick humor (like Airplane, Naked Gun, etc.) and like your humor more thoughtful, rent 3 (think it's still one of the best comedy movies ever made.) But, if you like to laugh like twice, and like your humor to be stupid and such, see this one. I think most will be disappointed and to add to this movie's cringe factor, it might have killed off the spoof movies.
I only gave it a 2 because that is the amount of times it made me laugh, suppose it's better than none!
DOA: Dead or Alive (2006)
For what it is, pretty good but far from great
First off, you don't see a movie based on a video game and expect "Shawshank Redemption"! This is a martial arts video game, adapted to a movie and catered toward teenage boys! A lot of reviewers are "thinking" too much considering what I just said. This is also a movie focused on fans of the DOA video game, but like most movies things are changed and that is hardly ever for the better. I think someone needs to go all out and change the way these video game movies are handled, try not to change the characters at all, or the plot but just do everything better and make sure the cast works well together and add some cool stuff. A well made movie like that would skyrocket at the box office and open up a big money well in Hollywood.
That being said, it's actually pretty good, though the case doesn't work great together, some characters are completely blown off (which will anger fans of them), and the worse was Ryu Hayabusa (of Ninja Gaiden and DOA fame). Instead of being portrayed as one of the most beloved video game characters of all time, he is not shown much, and doesn't live up to how he should have been. Others, like Lei Fang were in themovie a whole minute or two.
Devon Aoki is somehow strangely attractive (not on the par of Vance, Carter, or Priestly of course) but she is dull, and monotone the whole movie. She was pretty terrible, much better in Sin City.
Holly Vance is simply gorgeous, and her character was pretty cool. Priestly looked great, her acting were very good considering the dismal plot, and her body looked amazing. She was perfect for her part and didn't disappoint like most of the others. Sarah Carter is graceful and gorgeous as well, and all three of them have very sexy toned bodies, but don't look like they are going to blow away in the wind. Carter has one of the nicest butts I have ever seen! The former wrestler (or maybe current?) Diesel as Bass was pretty amusing.
Now the plot: Considering there is not a ton to work with considering the video game is based on a martial arts tournament, it's uneven, pacing is overkill or slow (no medium), and the actors/actresses are uneven, some are great and some just bad. Eric Roberts was decent, and he has always been underrated IMO.
The women in this movie are amazing looking, and provide more than enough eye candy. They are also scantily clad in most of the movie, but it's more tasteful than it could have been. Remember: This is a video game known for scantily clad women and bouncing boobs!. There is also a nice nod to the "Dead or Alive: Beach Volleyball" and it was actually pretty well executed.
Don't expect any movie awards, but a decent action/martial arts movie with lots of action and beautiful women. Also, DOA fans will like it or hate it depending on how you feel they handled the characters.